If we lived in a society where the media was not part of the government and actually reported the news rather than pushed government propaganda, not only would this woman not be allowed to get away with saying something this stupid and demonstrably false, she couldn’t possibly get elected:

Now, we’ve already covered the evidence – from the medical community – proving that movies and video games are directly connected to increased rates of violence. We have also shown that Pelosi knows this as the information was presented directly to Congress. So she is lying . There is no other way to put this: Pelosi is lying and knows she is lying – period!

We’ve also shown that gun laws are also connected to violence, only in the opposite direction Pelosi is claiming. The more gun laws passed, the higher the crime rates get. The more weapons in the hands of private citizens, the lower the crime rates get. This is a correlation that is borne out around the world. Pelosi knows this, too. So, once again, the woman goes on national TV and intentionally lies to the American people.

But this is a given. Anyone who assumes a politician – any politician – is telling the truth is not qualified to vote in this nation. At this point, the safe bet is to assume all politicians are lying until they prove otherwise through action. What we should take from this story is that it further proves the media is not doing the job our founders intended it to do. And, at some point, the media loses its 1st Amendment rights. You see, the government I not a person, therefore, it does not have 1st Amendment protection. So, the moment the “press” becomes an active part of the government, it loses its protection as well. At that point, it ceases to be the press and becomes the propaganda arm of the government (i.e. an enemy of the people). Now, I’m not sure at what point this happened, but this story clearly demonstrates that that line was crossed long ago.

[Note: In this interview, Pelosi also announces to the world that she is an idiot. See if you can catch it.]

ADDENDUM

I can’t spell. This is thanks to a Liberal teaching program called “aei reading,” which taught phonetics and even used its own alphabet. Yes, I learned to read faster than most, but thanks to this system, I have NEVER been able to grasp the proper spelling of the English language (thank you, John Dewey, et al). Anyway, it came to my attention that I misspelled the original title of this post, which was giving liberals an excuse not to read it. They assumed essay must be worthless because I can’t spell (but their assumption actually say more about their ability to reason correctly because they don’t realize that is fallacious reasoning). I originally typed:

Now I understand what the RNL is that Kells talks about – it’s this blog! Who is the administrator? How do you all share a blog like this? I am intrigued now..
We may not agree on everything, but we do agree on this: All politicians lie. I come from a family of anti-government “anarchists”, so I grew up knowing this fact as well as I knew my own name.
Please do fill me in on how you do your group posting. I think it would be nice to not have to be the only one posting on my site. Give Kells a kiss hello for me.

Well, I suppose I would be the “administrator” now that Kell’s BF ran off on us, but I prefer to think of myself as chief herdsman instead. I’m just trying to keep everyone between the white lines. As for group posting, I think you’ll have to educate me on that one. I’m not sure what that is (let alone how it works).

Sorry, I know just enough about maintaining this place to be dangerous ;-)

I assumed that with all the different authors, it was more like group posting rather than a single person and guests, but what do I know? I do know things tend to be better in groups – well, according to Winnie the Pooh anyway.

Ah, now I see (said the blind man). Well, it’s like this: you post your comments here and, if you mess up and sound too intelligent and/or informative too consistently, you end up getting drafted (i.e. invited) to become a contributor to the blog. Some accept their new duty (i.e. offer), others are weasels and decline to serve (they’re the smart ones who run from said offer ;-) ). And THAT is how you become a contributor. ;-)

Oh no, you misunderstand me. I am a (new) Kenysian – you guys would tear any opinion I had apart like hungry lions. I just thought it was interesting, all your different authors and all. I am trying to run a few blogs and lagging behind, so the idea that somebody else would write my posts was a nice one :) I still plan to follow though – kind of a cool place to be.

Well, that’s probably because Keynese was an idiot. Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying he was stupid. He just didn’t understand that an economy is not a zero-sum thing. It grows. And if it grows, ALL his work is rendered meaningless as it was primarily based on zero-sum thinking.

I see you are trying to tease me into an argument here… and there are times I do love an argument about economics… Rand lovers tend to not be able to move into the post industrial age economics game and cling dearly to her books full of ideas from a woman who was trapped in Russia.. but regardless, I am going to just hang out here with you guys.. You know, like a stray dog you throw a bone once in awhile. I will save my arguments for people I can quarrel with face to face.. so much more fun that way ;)

“Post industrial age economics?” LOL, nice try, but that won’t work around here. Doing something like giving an issue a fancy name and pretending as though that changes human nature is a non-starter on the RNL. Economics is about human nature. Human nature does not change. Therefore, the basic principles of economics is the same today as it was the first time man ever traded with another person.

As for the reference to Rand, that is another tricky thing. You see, the blog is named after the Rio Norte Line and what it and its owner stand for, but not necessarily for Rand or her philosophies. In fact, if you’ll do a search, you’ll find I have been quite critical of Rand’s philosophy on this very blog ;-)

You are doing a great job of baiting me in here, I almost came back to defend myself! Impressive, I don’t lure easily! Behavioral economics is economics – but there is more to consider in behavioral economics than incentives and consumer behavior… *Sigh*
I’m in my nightie, I am turning off my computer for a good book. I will do some lurking and poking around in the next few days to look for ammunition… errr… your positions. I really do hate to argue though. Nothing I say will change your mind, nothing you say will change mine, it’s just a reason to all worked up. :)

Oh, nay-nay. If you can show me — using reason supported by illustration and example — that Keynes was correct, I’ll change my mind. But the problem you’ll have is that the empiracle evidence (i.e. what we can actually observe) of economic theory all rests with Hayek and the Austrians — NOT Keynes. :-)

B. is incorrigible. He’s very adept at dishing out spankings, but loathe to taking them…….and he HAS gotten spanked here…….especially by me. (I had to scream a bit as that is what B. is fond of…..) Oops, almost forgot: :oops:
I’m the one who lives in his head rent-free.

I need to make a request.
My lib friends instantly discount this post because ‘rescinding’ was misspelled in the title. Their argument is, “If the guy can’t even spell, why should I believe what he has to say?”
They have a point.
Like Rubio’s drink of water, they are using any and all excuses to discount conservatives and conservative ideas, except, of course, the truth.
We need to step up our game and not give them any excuse. Their sheeple will believe anything that is spewed out, so be careful folks. We are dealing with FM-types. Sigh…